Robert Blake's lawyers filed a motion to dismiss the murder charges against him today. They says the state has no evidence:

The motion, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, claims no forensic evidence links Blake to the shooting. No gunshot residue was discovered on Blake, and no DNA tests connected him to the murder weapon, the motion states.

Blake's lawyer, Tom Mesereau, said the prosecution has no case. "The reality is they came up with no evidence at all he participated in the shooting," he said.

The motion will be heard October 31. We'd like to read the motion. Usually, once a judge finds probable cause to bind the case over for trial, it's up to the jury to decide whether the evidence is sufficient. If the prosecution's proof falls short, the defendant moves for a judgment of acquittal at the end of the prosecution's case. We're thinking there must be more to the motion than the lack of direct or physical evidence.

Don't miss the new Nat Hentoff column on the Jose Padilla case and the strong opposition to Bush's handling of the enemy combatant issue by numerous lawyers' groups on both sides of the bar. Here's the beginning:

Ignored by most media, an array of prominent federal judges, government officials, and other members of the legal establishment has joined in a historic rebellion against George W. Bush's unprecedented and unconstitutional arrogance of power that threatens the fundamental right of American citizens to have access to their lawyers before disappearing indefinitely into military custody without charges, without seeing an attorney or anyone except their guards.

The case, Padilla v. Rumsfeld, is now before the Second Circuit Court of Appeals. In a compelling friend-of-the-court brief on Padilla's behalf by an extraordinary gathering of the aforementioned former federal court judges, district court judges, and other legal luminaries of the establishment bar, they charge:

On Monday, 11 judges on the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals will rehear the California recall decision issued by three of its judges earlier this week. None of those three judges will be on the panel.

Undoubtedly, the loser will petition the Supreme Court for review. Shades of Bush v. Gore all over the place. If the Supremes refuse to hear the case or rule differently this time around, it will only add to the firestorm of criticism that the Bush v. Gore decision was decided on politics, not law. Should such an unwarranted decision result, we think the message will be clear: Our judges should be free of ideologies that affect their judicial decisions. We hope that translates into rejections for many of Bush's judicial picks around the country.

[comments now closed]

Here's the latest on the alleged murder for hire plot in the Kobe Bryant case, including a rare public statement by Kobe's lawyers.

Bryant’s attorneys made a rare public appearance Thursday night. They wanted to emphasize that the threatening letter was sent to the Lakers, who gave it to Bryant. Bryant and his security alerted the L.A. County sheriff’s department. ...During the tape-recorded conversation which the L.A. sheriff's department recorded, this gentleman repeated his offer to make the problem go away for three million dollars,” Bryant attorney Hal Haddon said.

“This atmosphere not only threatens Mr. Bryant, threatens his lawyers, threatens the accuser, but it threatens the fundamental right of a fair trial before an impartial jury,” Haddon added.

“Our concern about this is that this is not only going to create a side show, but that this is going to create a wave of sympathy that is going to prevent us from having an impartial jury who will simply judge the allegations on their facts.” Haddon said.

They are in a bizarre and difficult situation. They have repeatedly said they do not want to try the case in the media. They have declined interviews, but felt this time it was important to explain publicly what happened. “He is outraged of the making of these kinds of threats and these offers are made. He's afraid for his family. His first reaction was that he was terribly afraid for his family and he wanted to leave his house and he's also very concerned that he can't get a fair trial in this atmosphere,” Haddon said.

We are scheduled to discuss this and other new developments in the case tonight on Hannity and Colmes and tomorrow night on Rivera at Large (always subject to change due to breaking news events.)

Update: There's breaking news in the Laci Peterson case. We'll be talking about Kobe on Rivera Sunday night instead of tonight.

Atrios has an update on the motion to hold Attorney General John Ashcroft in contempt in the Detroit terror trial for his improper comments. The defense had requested a contempt order against Ashcroft for violating the Court's gag order. The matter was postponed until the trial was over. It's now over. And being considered.

Here's some background on the incident. After learning of the remarks back in October, the Judge declared:

I was distressed to see the attorney general commenting in the middle of a trial about the credibility of a witness who had just gotten off the stand," Rosen said. Later, Rosen added, "The attorney general is subject to the orders of this court. ... The attorney general has specifically been put on notice about the scope of its gag order."

Our opinion at the time:

The Attorney General of the United States knows better than to comment on trial evidence at a press conference. It's the second time he has violated the gag order in the case, according to defense counsel. The Judge may make Ashcroft explain himself after the trial. That hardly helps the defendants overcome the prejudice caused by his comments if one of the jurors saw the conference or had his comments repeated to him or her. Jurors weigh the credibility of witnesses and strength of evidence, not proseuctors.

The sheriffs in LA have finished their investigation into the shooting death of a woman at music producer Phil Spector's house last year. They have concluded it was not suicide and that Spector shot the gun. LA prosecutors are now considering charges against Spector. According to officials, possible charges range from second degree murder to manslaughter. A decision is expected next week.

Spector has been represented so far by former OJ attorney Robert Shapiro. Just what California needs, three high profile trials at the same time--Robert Blake, Scott Peterson and now Phil Spector.

This just in via email:

News Advisory

Contacts:
Aarti Shahani, Families for Freedom, 212.898.4121
Benita Jain, Immigrant Defense Project, 212.898.4134

KIDNAPPED AT FEDERAL PLAZA

Immigrant Families Expecting Greencards & Citizenship Get Deported Instead

WHAT:
Immigrant families are facing a deportation crisis. In the last month immigrant advocates have received emergency calls from New Yorkers whose loved ones - on the road to obtaining a greencard or citizenship - were deported from Federal Plaza after responding to government appointment letters. Others who are not being deported immediately are being shipped away as far as Louisiana without seeing a judge. Devastated and enraged, the relatives left behind will return to the site to speak out against the rapid-fire detentions and deportations that have broken apart their homes.

WHO:
MARIANA TAPIA, cousin of 19-year-old Juan Jimenez, who was deported to the Dominican Republic 16 hours after reporting to Federal Plaza for citizenship.

GEORGIANA FACEY, U.S. citizen whose husband was deported to Jamaica. She is left to raise 4 children alone in Brooklyn.

Many others.....

Don't forget to check out the new DNC blog, Kicking Ass. And donate to the Carville & Begalla Challenge.

American Prospect has an article in the October 1 issue (available now online) advising candidates how to connect with America's Youth. [link via Hamster.] Here's one of the suggestions:

14. Learn tolerance from the young. This is the most tolerant generation in American history. We need to enact legislation recognizing domestic partnerships, preventing hate crimes, restoring rights to immigrants and getting rid of laws like the so-called PATRIOT Act that invite censorship, invasion of privacy and a denial of our liberties.

We agree....and we note that the author referred to "preventing hate crimes" rather than "punishing hate crimes more severely." Nice touch.

Nine current and former law enforcement officers were arrested Thursday following sting operations in Illinois aimed at cops who rip off drug dealers. They include,

...two Illinois state parole agents, four police officers, two Cook County sheriff's deputies and a former Seattle police detective.

Here's how it worked:

Typically, an undercover informant led the lawmen to a parked car he identified as that of a drug dealer, and the lawmen would break into it, federal officials said. In most of the stings, the officers would take cash and fake cocaine. The lawmen would keep the cash and the undercover informant kept the bogus cocaine -- preventing those targeted from discovering the drug wasn't real, officials said.

The nine were charged with either attempted robbery of cocaine or attempted possession of cocaine. All will be in jail for the weekend, as bond hearings won't take place until Monday.

Attorney General John Ashcroft disclosed Thursday that no requests for library records have been made under the authority granted the Government by the Patriot Act. Hardly a surprise, since otherwise, he would not have agreed to release the information.

As we mentioned yesterday, the data we want to see pertains to the FISA electronic surveillance and search warrants the Justice Department has obtained--so it can be determined whether such warrants were necessary or fruitful in conjunction with a terrorism investigation as opposed to a criminal investigation. If only for the latter, then our fears are correct--that the Justice Department is using its new FISA powers to circumvent the Fourth Amendment.

As to the library records, if none have been requested in the aftermath of 9/11, why does the Government need the power to get them? We agree with Congressman John Conyers who says:

"Given the potential for abuse of library and bookstore records, I can see no reason why — if this authority was not needed to investigate Sept. 11 — it should stay on the books any longer."

Bump and Update: Two brothers, Ahmed and Muhammad Bilal, pleaded guilty today as announced yesterday. One agreed to an 8 to 14 year sentence and the other to a 10 to 14 year sentence. What did they admit to doing?

In the plea agreement, the brothers said they "were prepared to take up arms and die as martyrs if necessary to defend the Taliban government in Afghanistan."

The agreement also noted the brothers began training in summer 2001, in advance of the September attack, "to prepare themselves to fight a violent jihad in Afghanistan or in another location at some point in the future."

The text of the plea agreement is here.

************************
(original post, 9/17, 5:25 pm)

Two more defendants, Ahmed and Muhammad Bilal, will plead guilty Thursday in the Portland, Oregon terror case.

The men are accused of traveling to China in a failed attempt to enter Afghanistan shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attack in order to assist al-Qaida and the Taliban.

This is the case in which Mike Hawash pleaded guilty a few months back. It's also the case which the the LA Times concluded the Indictment "is more suggestive of bumbling, would-be holy warriors than of soldiers training for deadly missions."

Our view back then was: